Eminent jurist urges government to stick with convention of appointing senior-most judge.
New Delhi: Eminent jurist and senior advocate Fali Nariman Friday warned the government against defying convention in appointing the next chief justice of India. “We have had two supersessions so far and both have been disastrous for the country,” he said.
Supersession, if it happens, will be contrary to the convention of appointing the senior-most judge as the chief justice of India.
Nariman was in conversation with ThePrint Chairman and Editor-in-chief Shekhar Gupta on Walk The Talk, a show broadcast on news channel NDTV.
The government has repeatedly sought to play down speculation that Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who is next in line to be appointed as CJI, after incumbent Dipak Misra retires in October, may be superseded. Gogoi was among the four senior-most Supreme Court judges who had held a press conference against the CJI in January this year.
‘Government can’t shift the onus on CJI Misra’
In wake of BJP president Amit Shah stating that the Centre will go with the recommendation of CJI Dipak Misra in appointing his successor, Nariman made it clear that the government cannot shift the onus onto Misra. “The convention is not being bound by the CJI recommendation. The convention is appointing the senior-most judge as CJI,” he said.
With Nariman’s latest book, “God Save the Hon’ble Supreme Court”, set to hit the stands, he also recounted a tumultuous year for the judiciary. Although he reiterated that CJI Misra must reach out to his colleagues and restore collegiality, he blamed the four senior judges for holding the press conference in January this year.
“If you cannot sort the issue internally, then lump it. But the four judges erred in going public against the CJI. But the CJI must bring collegiality as the leader of the constitutional court. How he does this is his job,” he said.
Nariman also criticised the opposition’s move to bring impeachment proceedings against Misra. “In cases like these, you must shoot to kill. Otherwise, you bring the man to disrepute,” he said.
The eminent jurist also supported the court’s recent ruling reiterating that the CJI’s powers as the master of the roster are unqualified. “It is absolutely the business of only the CJI to allot work to other judges. I don’t understand this business of lawyers asking any judge how this case came up before him. In that case, you might as well ask him for his warrant of appointment,” he said.
They either did not deem it fit or lacked moral courage to question any/every such decision during the past “TOLERANT” six decades. However, they have all mustered enough courage to warn the Govt and say what they like during the current “INTOLERANT” regime.
Mr. Nariman was absolutely correct. Top judges should not have come up with conference to show dissent. It only shows that judiciary is not supreme, media is supreme. If top judges cannot resolve their dispute, then how will General public trust them for resolution.
For Opposition in calling for impeachment was Kurdish.
What was the reason for political parties to throw their weight behind four judges.
CJI showed masterclass by not reacting to chaotic situation and performed his duties.
Next CJI shall be senior most as per roaster, then we can challenge his marking of matters and roaster.
Let’s say India no more needs platitudes and homilies, sorry no, not any more, no matter how wise and aged, even a revered octogenarian you are in the fraternity. What we need are facts that are irrefutable and acts that are done transparently, which satisfies the general public – and only because they are unquestionable. Faulting the four seniormost judges of the apex court for holding the press conference in January 2018 to place the unseemly goings-on in the Supreme Court in the public domain presage two things: either Fall Nariman knew more than what the four judges knew; or he is wiser than the four judges put together. I guess the first isn’t true, which then brings me to the second, his wisdom greater than the composite wisdom of the quartet of judges. While this is a polemical question open to debate, what though is indisputable is that judiciary is one important organ that’s shrouded in secrecy. Shanti Bhusan’s petition alleging corruption at the highest level in the apex court is still pending for the last 7-8 years. I wish Nariman had the courage of his conviction and intellectual honesty to expatiate on this aspect rather than trotting out those banalities he’s so fond of dishing out from time to time. He seems to be having endless senior moments!
Great, really! I am still not able to get the logic of Mr. Nariman on both the counts. Perhaps this may be his opinion on which I prefer to avoid comments.
One may not agree with Shri Fali Nariman on the advisability of that remarkable press conference on a sun dappled lawn. That served a useful purpose; should circumstances warrant it in future, one hopes apex court judges will have the moral courage to do so again. 2. Of many institution harming acts of Mrs Gandhi, the supersession of judges was the most egregious. That folly has not been repeated in forty plus years. It would be a healthy convention if the CJI’s recommendation of his seniormost colleague becoming his successor is placed before the full Court for formal endorsement. There should be no occasion for an ambitious Caesar to be waiting in the wings. 3. When Justice Ranjan Gogoi participated in the press conference, there was some talk that he might be placing his promotion on the line. Since some hurtful speculation continues to swirl, it would be best for the health of the institution if, instead of waiting till October, an immediate announcement is made. 4. As far as mastery over the roster is concerned, the issue is not who has his finger on the button. Instead, it is that this power is exercised in a manner that judicial colleagues, advocates, litigants, the general public are completely sanguine that there is a black band placed over the eyes of the honourable CJI.